|
|
Post by Tyfo on Dec 30, 2005 3:00:35 GMT -5
The U.S. title was revived in the WWE in the summer of 2003. It has been around for 2 Royal Rumbles now and in both of those Rumble matches the US Champion has been the runner up in the match.
In 2004, Big Show was the US champ at the time of the Rumble and he was the last man eliminated by Benoit. In 2005, John Cena entered the Rumble as the US Champion and was the last man tossed by Batista.
So, will the US Champion this year keep the streak alive? Or the bigger question maybe, will we even have a US Champion before the Royal Rumble this year.
I could see Benoit or Booker as a Rumble runner up this year, so if a champ is determined before then, we may have a pretty nice streak here.
|
|
|
|
Post by skyday1402 on Dec 30, 2005 3:07:58 GMT -5
I've noticed that before as well. I'm actually intrigued by who may win the Rumble this year. The best guess is Orton.. but I see Rey Rey pulling an early number and lasting the whole Rumble and winning, building up to Batista vs Rey Rey at WM. David vs Goliath can sell, my friend. If they built Rey as a huge underdog on a relentless winning streak and kept them both face, that match would generate a great deal of interest, IMO.
|
|
|
|
Post by tamuthetongantiger on Dec 30, 2005 3:33:30 GMT -5
I have to doubt it will continue and I chalk up the history as coincidence.
Much as I love the US title (it was a prize that signalled future main eventer when I was young) it hasn't meant anything in the WWE. A revived hardcore title would mean more right now. Sure, seeing Booker and Benoit fight for it has helped, but that help came too late.
Honestly. I wish they stuck to their guns and had just one world title, defended on both shows, with the US title being the greatest "Smackdown Only" prize and the Intercontinental Belt being the pinnacle of Raw and a stepping stone towards the one undisputed worled championshhip.
As it is now, with a world champ on each show and a secondary champ as well, the whole idea of secondary belts has falllen apart. And, as you'd expect, the US Title, not invented by Vince and the WWE, has fallen farther than the ludicrously named Intercontinental belt.
As for The Royal Rumble, the topic of this thread and an issue I haven't even addressed -- it's an event meant to elevate Wrestlemania's title challenger towards stardom. But, though it used to work, it hasn't worked recently. No surprise there. If they can't make stars out of their secondary title holders (remember back, Honky Tonk Man, Randy Savage, Rick Rude and The Ultimate Warrior were all once made by reigning as IC champs) and, given that there's no more King of the Ring (an event that, in recent times, turned Edge into a legit singles star) what can we expect from The Royal Rumble? In all of the Royal Rumble years, only two guys (Flair and Benoit) were able to use it to make a lasting impression on the show.
US champs and their impact on the show or match? Gotta be a coinciidence. WWE's main problem right now is that Vince hasin't figured out how to use his old ideas to turn his workers into stars.
|
|
|
|
Post by tmp2005 on Dec 30, 2005 3:33:59 GMT -5
I agree. I think the time is right to finally solidify Rey as a main-eventer and give him the belt.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tyfo on Dec 30, 2005 3:46:06 GMT -5
they could easily use the Rumble to elevate anyone they wanted, because its so established that as long as whoever comes out of it as the winner had a pretty good showing (i.e. no cheap wins like from #29 like Lesnar in '03) then they will be seen as far more legit then they did going in.
This year they could make Lashley, Masters, Carlito, Rey, Shelton Benjamin, or any of the midcarders that have been sitting in the near main event spots recently. But they could also make them without them winning the whole thing. Diesel was cemented as a legit badass in the 94 Rumble. DiBiase, Martel, Valentine, Bulldog, Kane, Hunter, Rock have all had really long stints in a Rumble match but didnt win, but they came out as bigger stars because of it (well, if it wasnt for the crappy Valentine face push of 91, but they tried, sort of). Bob Backlund's long run in 93 paid of for him, it wasnt for almost 2 years later however, but he did eventually get pushed again! so the Rumble can make anybody, just put them in a situation to look good without winning, and then the winner looks even better in the process.
|
|
Tom
Don Corleone
Power Of Station.
Posts: 2,018
|
Post by Tom on Dec 30, 2005 5:33:01 GMT -5
I have to doubt it will continue and I chalk up the history as coincidence. Much as I love the US title (it was a prize that signalled future main eventer when I was young) it hasn't meant anything in the WWE. A revived hardcore title would mean more right now. Sure, seeing Booker and Benoit fight for it has helped, but that help came too late. Honestly. I wish they stuck to their guns and had just one world title, defended on both shows, with the US title being the greatest "Smackdown Only" prize and the Intercontinental Belt being the pinnacle of Raw and a stepping stone towards the one undisputed worled championshhip. As it is now, with a world champ on each show and a secondary champ as well, the whole idea of secondary belts has falllen apart. And, as you'd expect, the US Title, not invented by Vince and the WWE, has fallen farther than the ludicrously named Intercontinental belt. As for The Royal Rumble, the topic of this thread and an issue I haven't even addressed -- it's an event meant to elevate Wrestlemania's title challenger towards stardom. But, though it used to work, it hasn't worked recently. No surprise there. If they can't make stars out of their secondary title holders (remember back, Honky Tonk Man, Randy Savage, Rick Rude and The Ultimate Warrior were all once made by reigning as IC champs) and, given that there's no more King of the Ring (an event that, in recent times, turned Edge into a legit singles star) what can we expect from The Royal Rumble? In all of the Royal Rumble years, only two guys (Flair and Benoit) were able to use it to make a lasting impression on the show. US champs and their impact on the show or match? Gotta be a coinciidence. WWE's main problem right now is that Vince hasin't figured out how to use his old ideas to turn his workers into stars. Lest you forget, Batista won the last Rumble. |
|
|
|
Post by tamuthetongantiger on Dec 30, 2005 5:37:17 GMT -5
I have to doubt it will continue and I chalk up the history as coincidence. Much as I love the US title (it was a prize that signalled future main eventer when I was young) it hasn't meant anything in the WWE. A revived hardcore title would mean more right now. Sure, seeing Booker and Benoit fight for it has helped, but that help came too late. Honestly. I wish they stuck to their guns and had just one world title, defended on both shows, with the US title being the greatest "Smackdown Only" prize and the Intercontinental Belt being the pinnacle of Raw and a stepping stone towards the one undisputed worled championshhip. As it is now, with a world champ on each show and a secondary champ as well, the whole idea of secondary belts has falllen apart. And, as you'd expect, the US Title, not invented by Vince and the WWE, has fallen farther than the ludicrously named Intercontinental belt. As for The Royal Rumble, the topic of this thread and an issue I haven't even addressed -- it's an event meant to elevate Wrestlemania's title challenger towards stardom. But, though it used to work, it hasn't worked recently. No surprise there. If they can't make stars out of their secondary title holders (remember back, Honky Tonk Man, Randy Savage, Rick Rude and The Ultimate Warrior were all once made by reigning as IC champs) and, given that there's no more King of the Ring (an event that, in recent times, turned Edge into a legit singles star) what can we expect from The Royal Rumble? In all of the Royal Rumble years, only two guys (Flair and Benoit) were able to use it to make a lasting impression on the show. US champs and their impact on the show or match? Gotta be a coinciidence. WWE's main problem right now is that Vince hasin't figured out how to use his old ideas to turn his workers into stars. Lest you forget, Batista won the last Rumble. True enough, good point. And, I'd say, based on crowd reactions to Batista at the time, having him win was the right decision. But, still, even though the Rumble got him his title shot, the real story was him rebelling against hist mentors... HHH and Flair. The Rumble that year was a plot point, but hardly a focal point. |
|
|
|
Post by Magneto on Dec 30, 2005 6:06:03 GMT -5
I have to doubt it will continue and I chalk up the history as coincidence. Much as I love the US title (it was a prize that signalled future main eventer when I was young) it hasn't meant anything in the WWE. A revived hardcore title would mean more right now. Sure, seeing Booker and Benoit fight for it has helped, but that help came too late. Honestly. I wish they stuck to their guns and had just one world title, defended on both shows, with the US title being the greatest "Smackdown Only" prize and the Intercontinental Belt being the pinnacle of Raw and a stepping stone towards the one undisputed worled championshhip. As it is now, with a world champ on each show and a secondary champ as well, the whole idea of secondary belts has falllen apart. And, as you'd expect, the US Title, not invented by Vince and the WWE, has fallen farther than the ludicrously named Intercontinental belt. As for The Royal Rumble, the topic of this thread and an issue I haven't even addressed -- it's an event meant to elevate Wrestlemania's title challenger towards stardom. But, though it used to work, it hasn't worked recently. No surprise there. If they can't make stars out of their secondary title holders (remember back, Honky Tonk Man, Randy Savage, Rick Rude and The Ultimate Warrior were all once made by reigning as IC champs) and, given that there's no more King of the Ring (an event that, in recent times, turned Edge into a legit singles star) what can we expect from The Royal Rumble? In all of the Royal Rumble years, only two guys (Flair and Benoit) were able to use it to make a lasting impression on the show. US champs and their impact on the show or match? Gotta be a coinciidence. WWE's main problem right now is that Vince hasin't figured out how to use his old ideas to turn his workers into stars. Edge was pushed hard in 2001 but the fans were really behind the likes of RVD and Booker T in the midcard that year more than Edge. It wasn't until he fueded with Kurt Angle in '02 in those rematches and started mixing up with the Smackdown 6 that he got a better reputation. |
|
|
|
Post by slik81 on Dec 30, 2005 9:19:18 GMT -5
What a great post!
I hadn't realized that before.
unfortunately I don't know if that will be the case this year.
I have a feel Orton or HHH will win to set up their respective brand's likely WM main-events
thought I would love for Mysterio to pick up the win and for us to get Batista-Mysterio at WM I don't think it will happen--and it seems like a given that Orton and Batista will feud because of all the hints toward a feud on tv--and if Orton is facing Batista at the Rumble--that's a feud that would last more than ppv and Batista is scheduled to face Kane at No Way Out so I'm pretty sure Orton or HHH will win the rumble.
|
|
